We struggled with this a lot in the drafting stage mostly because we have not had children so there was a struggle between how many bedrooms and space we may need when for now its just us two!

Ultimately we laid out everything we wanted and drew it out. It was entirely too big. Way too much square footage and the rooms were not the sizes we wanted. We decided for us- we would sacrifice rooms to allow for less square footage and larger rooms. We took out things that don't make sense for us or that we could live without. This is our forever home so we aren't worried about resale. We compromised and took out the dining room for a larger eat in area. We made a jack and jill stylish bathroom for the future kids versus having 2 full baths, downsized some wasted space, and had the drafter make an optional bonus space. This has allowed us to bid it separately and decide on the costs.

Our line of thinking was everyday living. What did we need and want in a home day to day.

We ended up just under 2500 square feet living with an optional bonus bringing it up to 2800- we will likely go ahead and do the bonus bc its not a huge price difference. We are in the bid process and this has been a whole new area of learning! The bids are coming in much higher than we anticipated. Best advice I can give you is talk to actual contractors in the area and describe what you are looking at and average price not people who even just built.

I think you need to consider the size of your family and how and how long you envision living in the house before size can be considered.

We started out with a smaller plan and it increased in size. But, we have four children, we envision living in this house into retirement and we entertain frequently. It was important to my husband that when the children are grown that they have their own space to come home to as well. He hates going to his families house and feeling like everyone is underfoot.

Our builder had already built and was living in the house plan we started with and there were certain areas that he wished were bigger in his own home. We listened and made them larger.

We have a ranch with a walkout basement which is only partially finished. There was temptation to finish the rest of it, but the budget was tapped out, so it will have to wait.

What line of thinking did you following deciding on the size of the house?

We started with the upstairs master bedroom: making it big enough to hold a Cal King bed with access room around the bed and some shelving. (large closet is behind the head of the bed).

Wanted to have one downstairs bed/bath for future use, will be office now, and a LONG LR/DR area with a view from front of house out to garden in the rear. Upstairs will have 3 bdr plus "sitting room/nursery" room next to MBR.

Make sure all stairs, doors and bathrooms are sized for potential wheelchair use.
Oddly, the staircase tread sizing controls the minimum house size - if the house gets too small, the stairs won't fit unless we have multiple landings. And we don't want that.

How did you deal with temptation to build bigger?
Think of construction costs! And housework!

What compromises have your settled for?
Really, none ... I'd be delighted if it could be built as planned.

What adjustments to plans did you make to keep the cost of building in check?

We were planning with cost in mind from the start. Simple as possible house outline and roofline (cube with gable-end roof)

We are planning on simple interior finishes - limited use of $$$ materials, looking for performance specs rather than just appearance. I found I could pay anywhere from $2.50 to $25.00+ for floor tile ... performance specs were equivalent, one was domestic, the other an Italian Import. If there is room in the budget for "bling", it's going to be in the form of art on the walls, not fancier faucets.

All doors the same size and finish (bulk buy pricing), windows as uniform as possible.

Simplified interior design - all but one bath will use the same tile and fixtures (lower error possibilities for installers, less overage), same flooring tile throughout, simple wood trim (Craftsman style, simple joins in flat locally produced boards), etc.

We moved most of the kitchen storage to the humongous pantry, which also acts like a vestibule, which minimizes cabinet cost. Laid out kitchen to use standard refrigerator in a niche. Niche bumps into the closet of the downstairs bedroom, so it's not a problem.

Galley kitchen, simplified countertop installs.

Exterior will be local rough-cut board and batten (authentic and least cost option) with a steel roof. Local welded work holding up veranda, plain planked veranda like old western board sidewalks ... very vernacular.

Last year, we finished what will be our retirement home, and is currently our weekend home. It is smaller than the huge second-home mansions that are in our development, and is quite different in that it is a modern design, whereas most of the other houses are "mountain vernacular." The house is not cheap; it is well-built by an exacting builder who did a lot of the work himself. Big windows that are not standard sizes, beautiful flooring, but the house is mostly a simple, straightforward design with simple (but well-made) finishes, consistent with modern design.

What line of thinking did you following deciding on the size of the house? We built the house for what we need. We don't entertain a lot, and with one kid away at college, and the other in college in a year, it will be just us all too soon. My philosophy was to built the house for the 95% of the time we live in it, not the 5%.

How did you deal with temptation to build bigger? I wasn't tempted. I wanted to go smaller. In determining sizes, we measured current sizes of rooms in our house, and decided if that size worked, or it needed to be larger or smaller.

What compromises have your settled for? I didn't want a third bedroom; I felt we didn't need it. But I was persuaded that a two-bedroom house in a community of huge places just didn't make sense. The third bedroom is supposed to be my husband's study/office, though he's never used it that way (as I predicted, he uses my office or the kitchen table). We've already had enough weekend visitors who use the room to make me feel better about having it.

What is a "reasonable" size of a house today? It depends on the situation.

What adjustments to plans did you make to keep the cost of building in check? The house was more expensive than we planned, but still within our cushion. Some things came in cheaper than expected. And we didn't really cut anything to compensate for the unexpected costs, such as needing to do additional excavation due to soils issues that the builder didn't know about.

BnB, you say that you now live in a 2000 sq foot house and it's plenty and that less is ideal for you. But your husband is pushing to build bigger. Do you know why your husband wants more space, what his needs/wants list is and how it differs from yours?

Omlet, I think he wants to please me and let me have whatever I desire. There is also a part of "bigger is better" line of thinking. We have a fairly large plot of land so we don't have land constraints as such. The house we live in right now has very spacious bedroom but the closets are equally tiny. I have noticed one you start expanding closets, pantries, etc, the house swells miraculously.

You shouldn't pay any attention to what's trendy today -- big houses, little houses, impressive houses; rather, choose based upon what you actually need to live comfortably.

I totally agree with your comment about not wanting to be a slave to your house. When I was younger (ironically, and poorer!) I wanted a large, impressive house. I wanted to incorporate all the ideas I saw in magazines, have this room and that room. I'd like to think I'm a lot smarter now.

I suggest you consider each room individually:

- What's your perfect living room? How does it compare to your current living room? How much furniture would you want it to hold? Now, what's its approximate dimension?

- What's your perfect bedroom? What sized bed would it hold? Do you want space for a dresser or seating, or do you want it to be accompanied by a closet to hold all your clothes? Now, what's its approximate dimension?

Go through each room and figure up what you would consider "perfect" in size ... then add it up. You'll still to connect the rooms with hallways, but that'll give you a ballpark idea of what's going to fit your needs.

I agree with LazyGardens in that I'm making a lot of "simple" choices that'll keep cost down: we're flattening out the footprint a bit, removing an unnecessary staircase, keeping the laundry on the exterior, going with mostly simple straight cabinet runs.

And I agree with VWTyler in that we're building a house for the 95% of the time that it'll be "just us" instead of a house to hold all the kids when they come home plus any children they may have. We'll be able to fit everyone in, even if they don't all have a private bathroom when they visit.

I'm going to disagree with you about houses miraculously growing when you up-size closets and utility areas; rather, I think the truth is that when you look at house plans with these larger items ... they're attached to houses with larger rooms and/or extra rooms. This is one of the reasons we chose to build (only one, we have two other reasons): We want rooms similar in size to the "starter house" in which we used to live, BUT we want those modest sized rooms to be attached to a walk-in closet, a generous laundry, good-sized bathrooms, and a large pantry. You don't seem to find that type of house "out there"; that is, the house we want is a mismatch of modest and large -- but our finished product is going to be around 1850.

BnB, I got the impression that you wanted one thing and he wanted something different and I'm glad that's not the case!

We built fairly small (1400 square feet), but there were a lot of considerations. This house is for a soon-to-be retired couple. We don't care about resale at all. We built it ourselves, all out of pocket. We actually wanted to go smaller, but by the time all of our wants and needs were met, here we are. We also have a fully insulated walk-out basement, so the house could be twice as big with very little work and cost.

Rather than obsess over an exact square footage, you need to figure out what your wants and needs really are. There are a lot of other factors affecting cost besides square footage. I've seen kitchens that cost more than our entire house! We concentrated on a simple, very sturdy and energy-efficient house with a minimum of frills. Our house certainly could have been a lot cheaper, but we wanted to try to keep a small environmental impact, and have a cheap-to-feed home for our retirement.

I read somewhere that 500 square feet per person is a good starting point. Based on that, retirees with 3500 square feet seems a bit excessive. Our last house was about 1500 square feet, and we were a family of three. It worked just fine, and there was a lot of space we rarely used. Our new house is bigger than that rule, but space got eaten up by a desire for more storage, and Universal Design for aging in place. Our master closet is the size of a small bedroom. We both cook, so the kitchen is also out of proportion a bit. I always say we designed the house around the kitchen. Stairs add a minimum of 70 square feet of essentially unusable space.

I like the idea of a modest house with expansion space somewhere for that once-a-year need. We have a nice barn, and I am going to insulate and finish a large room at one end. That way, if we ever have a BIG gathering (unlikely at this point) we have a huge room to use. It will also serve as a guest house for overnight guests, having its own bathroom. Since it technically isn't living space as defined by our local authorities, it won't add to our taxes. A woodstove will heat it for the few times we use it. As I said, our basement is fully insulated, and actually stays at a reasonable temperature year round. More expansion space for occasional usage.

Early American "folk" houses were built for exactly the reasons you describe--simple, built out of necessity and without decoration or excess. Currently there's an article on Houzz about Cape Cod houses which epitomize "folk" houses, with wonderful photographs and text descriptions. These are the typical Monopoly game "houses"--instantly recognizable rectangles, which can be added to and expanded to meet changing conditions. Take a look here: [https://www.houzz.com/magazine/roots-of-style-cape-cod-evolves-into-an-american-favorite-stsetivw-vs~52766477[(https://www.houzz.com/magazine/roots-of-style-cape-cod-evolves-into-an-american-favorite-stsetivw-vs~52766477)

Thank you so much everybody! I don't have anybody around to discuss all these things as people around for some reason or another aren't analytical but more "go with the flow do what everybody else does". I really appreciate all your input and the simple chance to talk and learn from all of you.

Virgil CFA, I am actually now studying precisely that - early Colonial architecture and find it utterly mesmerizing! Thanks for the link!

Mrs.Pete, thank you for the algorithm to thinking. We already measured what we have right now. I will proceed with the suggestions you gave to analyze what works and what doesn't and what would have to change to make it more desirable.

Mushcreek, I am in compete agreement for "let's not build for hypothetical scenarios that may never be". I have a fairly good idea how we live. We have been in the same place for about 20 years. Even if something changes, it can be accommodated with what we have at the time like so many people have done before us.:)

Omelet, I really liked your question! It is indeed important to untangle all the wants and needs of everybody at home to make sure that we are somewhat on the same page and moving in the same direction and not pulling in different directions. Definitely and strategic planning discussion when embarking on the road of building a house.:)

Katie, I will give everybody a piece of paper and ask them to write down what they do in the house now, where they do it and see if it works or how it can work better. Information gathering begins!

Corie, wow, such a large family! So nice! Very traditional. You must be anticipating lots of other new family members coming along - future spouses, grandchildren. I am sure your house will be the site of many family gatherings!

Stanleyridge, I am contemplating building up despite the fact that our original plan is really one-story house. We may have to change plans once building is moving from dreams to reality. The only negative of two floors is potential disuse in disability. Yet I wonder if contemplating worst case scenario is prudent or doomsday thinking. I have not found my answer yet.

LazyGardens, thank you for offering another way of house design from one room to a bigger house. I love your tips of uniformity and reduction of cost by increasing use of utility space and cutting down on the area of kitchen. I have not thought of this yet but do like the idea. I am cook from scratch kind of person and over the course of years discovered that I can cooks just about in any size kitchen and with just about any type of equipment.:)

Vwtyler, thank you for you story! So interesting to find out what exact thinking went into planning and decision-making. I see that you did not compromise on quality. This is something of a pet-peeve of mine. I love quality. You almost always invest once and it serves your for years. I also do like beautiful things. Yet there is fine line when I decide that is madness to overpay, say, for brand name for the sake of the name.

Back to thinking hard. It is a full-time job to just plan construction. Can't imagine the actual building stage!

About the idea of asking everyone what they need and want in the house: Call me old-fashioned or mean, but I'd only give papers to people who are paying for this house! Kids can choose the color of their rooms, but I get to decide how big they are and what features they hold!

I started with the idea of a two-story house, but as we went through plan after plan, we realized that we really had THREE must-haves, and a two-story wasn't one of them. I wouldn't suggest that your must-haves should match mine, but I do suspect that your ideas will evolve and solidify as you continue to study this topic.

Yes, the idea of the second floor being difficult to reach in our old age was one of our reasons to go with a one-story house. The other was that heating and cooling is more difficult in a two-story.

I totally agree with you that "a cook" will be fine in any size kitchen. Good organization is more important than size. In fact, although I am ALWAYS cooking and am generally acknowledged as the best cook in my social circle, I want a small kitchen. I'm actually cutting it down a bit from the original plan. Why? Because what I really want is a small one-butt U-shaped kitchen -- small because it'll be easier to keep it clutter-free and small because then I can afford really nice cabinets and artisan tile -- and a LARGE pantry to store all my stuff. Storing in a pantry makes it easier to see everything at once and is cheaper than storing in expensive cabinetry.

I don't know that I actually thought about having an "expansion space" for gatherings, but that is what we're doing. We're in the South, where outdoor entertaining is possible 8-9 months of the year. We're planning a pool and large patio, so we'll be the "summer gathering place"; other family members already have large indoor areas. We're fine with the idea of always hosting July 4, while others host Christmas.

It's very difficult for one house to be great for both a family and a retired couple who don't want another 'stop' before assisted living.

My DH and I spent two years looking for an existing 'small, single story, charming house with big rooms' -- something one Realtor dubbed 'a sweet house'. We didn't find it. We bought a teardown where we wanted to live and built a 2900 sq ft house. We use all of it daily, with only the DR and Guest Suite empty most of the time.

We 'overpaid' for the location. A builder would have put up the maximum 5-6000 sq ft home permitted on this acre. Other homes in our neighborhood go up to 12,000 sq ft on more than five acres. As a hedge to that, we built a full-height attic with permanent staircase. It can be finished by some future owner who wants more bedrooms and baths. The Kitchen, LR, Library and other first floor rooms are big enough to support that larger family -- yet we are not paying taxes on it, and our house 'fits in' with its larger neighbors.

Our house suits us perfectly, as Seniors. It would not suit a growing family. Reading here, I see a failure among *young Seniors* to know what they will find most comfortable when they are *old Seniors*. (We are mid-seventies and have already enjoyed 14 years here. Believe me, you want 'less' as your ability to do 'more' declines -- and declines more rapidly than you can imagine after 65.)

As for 'cost inflation', you'll find that in the finishes more than just square footage, extra boxes (bedrooms, closets, etc.). That's why spec builders build BIG -- lots of rooms but still only one kitchen, a few bathrooms, minimal trim -- the stuff that makes 'sweet'! LOL

"Quality" is a very fuzzy term, actually. The dollar amount of what it means depends on the person and the dollar amount available. We were more willing to spend more on structural matters; when it came to the light fixtures in the laundry room and the pantry, Home Depot simple was fine for the quality we wanted there.

We tried not to be swayed by brand names, and weren't, for the most part. I did a lot of research on stoves, because we use ours a lot. For us, we weren't real worried about the quality of washers and dryers - whatever mid-priced models we bought in 1993 still work just fine.

Ours is also a retirement house, so we didn't need to worry as much about, for example, children being children around the house.

In terms of old Seniors and young Seniors. Our house is located in a part of the country that if we developed serious medical problems, due to high altitude and snow, we likely wouldn't be able to to live there anyway. But our one stairway is wide enough for one of those chairs, and if we needed to re-do bathroom doorways, we could do that. Everything is already pretty accessible. But for you, consider your needs for the more immediate future, not what you'll need at that later point in your lives.

I am building bigger than the original plans for this log kit home.

The kit had a design with 1400 square feet, garage (and breezeway) included.

My house is going to be 2100 square feet, garage and NO breezeway. Hey, save space and money where you can! Yep, the garage sticks out front but I WANT the back view from the dining room! (People driving by who hate front-facing garages can just jolly well avert their eyes, but I am also well off the road anyway.) The garage is one-car, and I did expand the width slightly for storage, a stand alone freezer, and a treadmill.

In order to be (almost entirely - my guest bath/shower isn't...) ADA compliant, hallway width and bathroom sizes had to be increased.

I am a book packrat, so I wanted extra space for bookshelves.

I also wanted the laundry on the main floor, not down in the walk-out basement.

The initial design had my kitchen open and totally dysfunctional for a tall person with a bad back who really really likes to cook, and is entirely sick of using a back bedroom and my dining room for storage of cooking implements and serving platters. Basically, I built my house around my kitchen! (The original plan had the kitchen open to full view from the front door, too. I think with a larger kitchen I won't look cluttered, at least as much, but the whole notion of an exposed kitchen from my current perspective is anathema!) Yes, I know lots of uppers isn't exactly ADA, but it will WORK for my own current needs, and beats out my current kitchen in spades. (I consider ADA a worthy guideline, but they cannot cover all contingencies. I'm still TALL and still have a bad back, and I hope never to need a wheelchair, but I'm keeping this in mind!)

Stats: 3 bedroom, two full baths, laundry nook on main floor. 1 car garage, slightly extra-wide. Walk out basement for mechanicals, workshop and root cellar.

PS, at least with this kit, I was told that increasing the width of the house would cost me far more than increasing the length. So other than a little width increase (entirely relating to ADA sizings...), I focused on length. I understand it is the structural stability. You'll have to check regarding stick-built homes.

What line of thinking did you following deciding on the size of the house?

As a disclaimer we haven't decided on a specific number for the house we hope to build but we are considering the sizes of homes we have experience with and where spaces could have been bigger, smaller or better laid out. Right now we are thinking around 1600 is a sweet spot for us. We have lived in 1800 sq ft and currently live in 650 sq ft. Cost figures in as well of course.

How did you deal with temptation to build bigger?

Multiply the number of sq ft by a cost per sq ft, think oh my goodness, and figure out how it could be smaller :) Also recognize places where it has gotten larger "just in case" or because someone else thinks it might be "cramped" or compare room sizes back to what I know works. If I am happy in my x ft by x ft ___ room and happy with the furniture that fits in it why change? I also consider how much space I really want to clean

What is a "reasonable" size of a house today?

A less loaded question might be what is necessary or needful? My opinion would be that, special circumstances aside (home business, ADA, accessibility issues, home schooling, multi-generational homes etc.), a well designed 3-4 bedroom house ranging from 1600-2200 sq ft should be sufficiently large for most average families of 4 to live comfortably. Houses between 1600-2000 would also be affordable at a wide range of incomes. If they are well designed in terms of site/climate suitability and energy efficiency they should also have low operating costs.

This family could live in 650 sq ft but unless they are minimalists they will likely feel cramped. 1200 would be plenty for many families' lifestyles if very well thought out but might not accommodate space hogging hobbies or frequent overnight guests.

Whether or not it is "reasonable" to build larger, or how much larger, than is necessary would probably depend on your income, the neighborhood, how much resources you want to use both building the house and operating it, financial considerations and other factors.

We are building a 2600 sq ft home. 3 bedrooms 2.5 bath. It's a ranch and has good size rooms. Since it's just two older people it's plenty big enough for anything needed. One room we don't have is an office as we can use one of the bedrooms for that if needed. Their is a small living room that will be used for a TV room. We have no need for a formal living room. We kept the formal dining room to use for holidays. It has a huge basement that will remain unfinished.

It is a lovely idea to build smaller with higher quality finishes. Those are the homes I am drawn to when I see them and walk through them. I went that direction for a while (although we have a large family) and my husband was fully supportive.

What really surprised us though (and tanked our plans for a high quality, smaller home after we purchased the land) was the bank's view of value. They wanted the square footage, and they wanted a lot of it, in order for the appraisal to match the build cost. The larger the lot, the bigger the home. The infrastructure can be a huge percentage of building costs (power, septic, excavation, water systems) and in our case the value of a 2400 sf home would not have covered these basic items, let alone all the quality features we wanted. I think that may be why you see much larger homes on those larger lots. It's not just because your typical American is super cheap and needs all that space. :) It's the banks wanting to have the collateral in case of default. But... if you are paying cash for all (or a large portion) of the build and you don't care about resale... it is a fantastic goal. And much easier to keep clean! In the early 20th century when a lot of those smaller homes were built with all those lovely built ins and details, the cost of a home was about 1-3 years of one persons income. Very attainable. That isn't so common anymore.